Case law

Becker v. Clark

722 So. 2d 232 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Nov 25, 1998

Qualified immunity shields a government actor from personal liability when his conduct does not violate clearly established rights. See Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 638 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987). … , under the most favorable version of facts alleged, the defendant's action violated clearly established law.

Reuther v. Anderson

677 So. 2d 38 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 3, 1996

We do not want this affirmance to be construed, however, as a holding that appellants are not entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 , 107 S.Ct. 3034 , 97 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987) (qualified immunity defense calls for a determination of whether a constitutional right asserted and allegedly violated was clearly established at time and

Alachua General Hosp., Inc. v. Zimmer USA, Inc.

403 So. 2d 1087 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 11, 1981

litigation is "closely related" to the previous, terminated litigation. [2] However, the weight of modern authority clearly provides that work product retains its qualified immunity after the original litigation terminates … Smith in his investigation of the Hospital fire was work product as to the initial wrongful death litigation, and retains its qualified immunity as to the present litigation.

Vermette v. Ludwig

707 So. 2d 742 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 10, 1997

As to the § 1983 claims, the officers grounded their summary judgment motion on an assertion of qualified immunity from suit. … If the public official's conduct did not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right, the official is immune." Stephens, 702 So.2d at 526 .

Baker v. Airguide Manufacturing, LLC

151 So. 3d 38 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 29, 2014

Based on the changes to her testimony, Baker argued that there was a genuine dispute over material facts whether Airguide possessed the requisite degree of control over Baker to establish Airguide’s immunity under the … Thus, an employer can establish its right to workers’ compensation immunity by either meeting the three-prong test for common law “borrowed servant” immunity or by establishing that the injured employee came from a “help

Knepper v. Genstar Corp.

537 So. 2d 619 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 20, 1988

Knepper, having worked in the explosives industry for over twenty-five years selling explosives and implementing their on-site use, had established a large clientele. … Where the circumstances and content of allegedly defamatory statements are clearly disputed by the parties, the jury should determine, under proper instructions from the court, whether or not the communication was privileged

Fernander v. Bonis

947 So. 2d 584 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 3, 2007

We first address Fernander's claim the trial court erred in finding that Captain Bonis was entitled to qualified immunity as to Fernander's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 due process claims. … A plaintiff suing a government official has the burden of showing that the official's acts, at the time, violated clearly established law." Alexander v. Univ. of N. Fla., 39 F.3d 290 , 291 (11th Cir.1994).

Buckner v. Lower Florida Keys Hosp. Dist.

403 So. 2d 1025 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 11, 1981

To support a cause of action for conspiracy to defame, it is therefore incumbent upon a plaintiff to properly allege those elements which would establish a defamation, one of which is a publication. Barry College v. … Although some do not heed to the pleading requirements, it is still mandatory under established precedent that a complaint must allege ultimate facts. Ocala Loan Company v. Smith, 155 So.2d 711 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963).

Debra Sue Rodriguez and MacEdonio Coc Rodriguez v. Donna Marie Currey

District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 3, 2025

This occurs when an order violates “a clearly established” legal principle. See id. at 355. “A classic example . . . is a trial court’s failure to follow binding precedent.” State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. … 355 (“There is an important difference between a departure from the essential requirements of law where there has been a violation of a clearly established principle of law and a case that involves an issue of law where

Sonny Boy, LLC v. Asnani

879 So. 2d 25 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 28, 2004

In my view, two different standards were intended and clearly imposed by these provisions. … Clearly section 718.303(1) was not involved, nor was it mentioned.

Melinda Butler v. Sarah Harter

152 So. 3d 705 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 1, 2014

Work-Product Privilege and Motions for Attorney’s Fees It is well-established that “work product retains its qualified immunity after the original litigation terminates, regardless of whether or not the subsequent … The federal district court held that counsel waived attorney-client privilege when he testified regarding the basis for the offer, and he clearly waived the privilege when he established a record regarding the basis for

Pensacola Christian College v. Bruhn

80 So. 3d 1046 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 30, 2011

Toyota Distribs., LLC., 60 So.3d 1155, 1157-58 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (“A special employer qualifies as such where ‘(1) there was a contract for hire, either express or implied, between the special employer and the employee; … Hecht Invs., Ltd., 924 So.2d 944, 945-46 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (holding that W-2 tax forms alone did not establish an employment relationship). Rather, as this court stated in Hoar Construction v.

Board of Regents of State v. Snyder

826 So. 2d 382 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jul 19, 2002

Qualified immunity protects government actors performing discretionary functions from liability and suit for civil damages *390 unless their conduct violates clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights. … Thus, qualified immunity in this case hinges upon whether Mr. Snyder's First Amendment right was clearly established.

City of Hialeah v. Fernandez

661 So. 2d 335 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 27, 1995

[FN3] Once the qualified immunity defense is raised, plaintiffs bear the burden of showing that the federal "rights" allegedly violated were "clearly established." … [The officer] is entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that the amount of force used outside the restaurant was unlawful. Post, 7 F.3d at 1559-60 (citations omitted).

Junior v. Reed

693 So. 2d 586 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 20, 1997

The trial court should have sustained Commissioner Junior's claim of qualified immunity, however, because the conduct forming the basis of the complaint by the Reeds does not amount to a violation of a clearly established … To qualify as a "clearly established" right as that phrase is used in Harlow v.

Stephens v. Geoghegan

702 So. 2d 517 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Oct 17, 1997

If the public official's conduct did not violate a clearly established statutory or constitutional right, the official is immune. Here, there can be no question that the defendants satisfied their initial burden. … Because Stephens, Upman and Worlds did not violate Geoghegan's clearly established statutory or constitutional rights, as delineated in Loudermill , they are entitled to qualified immunity from his federal civil rights claim

Tucker v. Resha

610 So. 2d 460 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 30, 1992

Tucker asserted a claim of qualified immunity, which shields from civil liability those governmental officials performing discretionary functions, to the extent "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … The "objective reasonableness of an official's conduct" relating to the clearly established law is the proper standard, for "[i]f the law was clearly established, the immunity defense ordinarily should fail, since a reasonably

Town of Southwest Ranches v. Kalam

980 So. 2d 1121 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 12, 2008

a clearly established right). … As Kalam’s complaint fails to show that the town officials’ conduct violated his rights in light of clearly established law, the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from suit.

Florida Highway Patrol, a division etc. v. Lashonta Renea Jackson, as Per. Rep. etc.

238 So. 3d 430 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 23, 2018

Reeves, 80 F.3d 1101, 1104 (6th Cir. 1996) (“Hunter established that the determination of whether qualified immunity applies to an officer’s judgment as to probable cause is one for the court, not the jury, to make”); Ansley … This appears to be the analysis undertaken by Judge Rothenberg in Pozos when she concluded that the record “clearly established” the legal question of sovereign immunity. Pozos, 42 Fla. L.

Grix v. Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission

821 So. 2d 315 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 22, 2002

The court also found that qualified immunity shielded the officer from. liability under section 1983 because he did not violate a clearly established law concerning proper.net measurements when stopping and detaining appellant … Therefore, Millender did not “clearly establish” the method of measuring such nets.